Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

7«l King Lear and the Celts. BT PROP. CHARLES DOD. The noble tragedy of King Lear has long stood,by the unanimous judgment of critics,pre eminent for sublimity aud pathos, among the mighty creations of the ‘myriad-minded’ Shake speare. The subject of this drama is drawn from a period far-removed among the mists of antiquity and obscured by the shadows of legend and tra dition—an age of heathenism fancies. His merit certainly does not consist in accuracy of statement, or in that critical spirit of careful investigation which leads the philo sophical historians of modern times to weigh all evidence with judicial severity and demand that it be in accordance with the recognized laws of testimomy before admitting to record events which claim to have been facts. Still, the old monk has merits as an historian which it would be unjust to overlook. His merit consists in having collected a body of legends highly sus ceptible of poetic embellishment, which, with out his intervention, would probably have per ished utterly, or existed only in the absolete and and barbarism ^ ^ r0U j?^ ston ® 3 j inaccessible writings of the Welsh bards and ~~ "" “ “ historians. These weird and wild legends, quarry, the master mason has constructed a shapely and imposing editice, which has been the delight of all the generations of worshipers that have crowded the shrines of his genius. It is curious, too, to observe how many inferior intellects, how many ordinary workmen, co-op erated with the great architect in achieving the final result. The dependency of genius upon antecedent laborers to provide it with the raw material to be woven into its wondrous fabrics, has been frequently illustrated in literary history, but in ao case made more clearly than in the history of this particular {flay of Shakespeare's. The original of the story is found in Goeffrey of Monmouth, an old Wklsh chroaioler, who, dur ing the twelfth century, occupied the leisure of his convent life in recording, in his monkish Latin, the legendary narratives in the Cymric tongue which were said to have been collected by a certain Tysilio, in the sixth or seventh cen tury of our era, from oral tradition, ballads, and such sources. This history — entitled ‘The Chronicle of the Kings of the Isle of Britain’— goes back almost to the Deluge. It deduces the Britons of later times from a Trojan ancestry, and derives their name from ‘Brutus,’ an imag inary great-grandson of .lEaeas, who came to the shores of aland called at first ‘Albion,’ (af ter, it is said, a son of Neptune who was its first King) where, conquering the aborginal inhabi tarns, he founded a dynasty, ‘sprung from old Anchises’line,’that ruied old Britain in unin terrupted succession till the landing of Julius Caesar in the year 55 b o. Then we have the Celtic wars, first with the Romans and after wards with the Saxons, down to the death of Cadwallader, King of Wessex, who flourished in the seventh century after Christ. Goeffrey’s account of Brutus and the subsequent British kings professes to be a direct translation of a manuscript in the Armerioaa or Breton di alect of the Cymric tongue, which his friend, the Archdeacon Waiter of Oxford, discovered about the year 1125, during a journey of his through French Bratagne. The Bretons of France and the Britons or Welsh across the Channel were closely kindred branches of the same Cvmrie stock. This manuscript was en titled Brut-Breuhined, or King Brutus, (Brenhin being the generic title of royalty among the Cymri, and appearing iu the name Breunus,’ which the Romans supposed to be the proper name of the leader of the Gallic hosts who burnt Rome in the year 390 b c.) But that Goeffrey had, in addition, other sources of in formation, and that the legends connected with the Trojan invasion had long been current among the mountains of Wales, and were not the fabrication either of Goeffrey or of Arch deacon Walter’s Armorican manuscript, is evi dent from the fact that the outline of the same story, in all its parts, from the Trojan descent to the wars of King Arthur, is found in Neunius, a writer who flourisned at least three centuries before Goeffrey. To us this all looks like the very witchcraft of history; and as we read the name of one king after another in these legendary annals that go buck to the very night of time, they pass before ny like the vi denary shadows of die k’.ngs that the wired sisters showed to Macbeth. 4nd yet, fantastic and fanciful a3 the narrative seems to us, we are almost startled into a belief in it by the bold and confident chronology of these an cient chroniclers. They deal with their eras of a thousand years, with a magnificent assurance, and marshal their kings and dynasties in com plete chronological order and exact succession, carrying their elaborate genealogies so far be yond the Olympiads that Greek and Roman his tory seems a thing of yesterday and British an tiquity is made to run parallel with Egyptian. We are gravely told of one British king flourish ing in the time of Saul, King of Israel, and of another being contemporary with Solomon; and that it was about a hundred years before the birth of the prophet Isaiah that King Lear was rnler in the “fast anchored isle.” (900 B. G.) Ludicrous as this mythical, chronology ap pears to us, it was devoutly believed iu by our forefathers uutil as lute as the sixteenth century, before which epoch nobody presumed to doubt that the Britons were descended from Brutus the Trojan. This legendary history bad so long formed part of the popular literature of England, aud had taken such tenacious root in the popular znind. that it was not relinquished until with the advent of the skeptical spirit introduced by the reformation, a more critical standard of his torical belief was adopted, and scientific investi gation began to take the place of an uninquiring and passive credulity. Even in the seventeenth century, the age of the Puritans, an age certainly very far from feeling any reverence for monastic legendary lore, we find so strong and acute au intellect as Milton’s expressing a lingering respect for these time honored legends and hesitating to avow a total disbelief in them. In the “History of Britain” which the great Puritan poet has left us. he dutifully and precisely enumerates the series of ancient sovereigns according to the traditions, though with some expressions of doubt—as when he writes: “I neither oblige the belief of other persons, nor hastily subseribe my own. Nor have I stood with others com puting, or collating yeirs and chronologies, lest I should be vainly curious about the time and oircumstance of things whereof the substance is so mnch in doubt.” This remark he intends for the stories, anterior to the Trojan legend; the subsequent chronicle he seems to regard as con siderably less mixed with fable and romance. He says: “Of Brutus and his line, with the whole proge ny of Kings to the entrance of Julius Grosar, we cannot so easily be discharged—descents of an cestry long continued, laws and exploits not plainly seeming to be borrowed or devised, which on the common belief have wrought no small impression, defended by many, denied utterly by few. For what through Brutus and the whole Trojan pretence were yielded up, (seeing they who first devised to bring us from some noble ancestor, were content at first with Brutus the Consul, till better inventions, though not willing to forego the name taught thorn to remove it higher into a more fabulous age; and by tbe same remove lighting on the Trojan tales, in affection to make the Briton of one original with the Roman pitched there), yet those old and unborn names of successive kings never any to have been real persons, or done in their lives at least some part of what has been so long remembered, cannot be thought without too strict an incredulity. . . . For these and the causes above mentioned, that which has re ceived approbation from so many I have chosen not to omit Certain or uncertain—be that upon the credit of those whom I must follow—so far as keeps aloof from impossible and absurd, at tested by ancient writers from books more anci ent, I refuse not as the dne and proper subject of story. Let os not, then abuse old Geoffrey of Mon mouth too much for his easy faith, or stigmatise hup as a mere garrulous babbler of fables and trembling on the verge of extinction, were ar rested by the loving hated of old Geoffrey, and restored to a new and larger life; for the nar rative in which he has interwoven them has exerted a powerful influence on the feelings and literature, not only of the English people, but of the coutinent of Europe. The popu larity of his work is proved bv the numerous adaptations, translations and imitations which successive authors gave of it. Wace, a chaplain of the Court of Henry I.. transformed the chronicle into a poem of 151,- 000 liues in which Anglo-Norman verse, for the delight of the rude baroas to whom the monk’s Latin was an impenetrable obstacle. Layamon, another ecclesiastic, who flourished iu what is called the “Semi-Saxon” period of English literature, viz., the latter half of the twelfth century and first part of the thirteenth, worked up the materials which Geoffrey and lVace had furnished him. into a poem of thir ty-thousand lines, iu honest Saxm measure, for the edification of those of his coua- trymen who understood neither Geoffrey’s Latin nor Wace’s French. Lastly, the work from which Shakespeare more immediately drew his material and kindled his imag ination with the historic conception of King Lear, was a work issued in two folio volumes ia 1577 by Holinshed, entitled “The Chroni cles of Englaud, Scotland, and Ireiaud—” a work ranging over a vast field, and em bodying the narratives of all previous histo rians. it was regarded in its day as a monu ment of industry and learning, and is still resorted to as an indispensable book of refer ence in stndying the early English annals. See, then, what a long train of anthors con tributed to the Siiakespearim consummation ! First, the legendary annals in the ragged Welsh tongue, supposed to have been found in the sixth centnry by Tysilio -though the author is perhap.i as much of a myth as the heroes whose exploits he recounts. N 'Xt, we have the Latin version by Geoffrey, of Monmouth in the be ginning of the twelfth century; then the Nor man French poetical version of Wace, about the middle of the twelfth century; Next, Layamon’s Saxon version of the same poem in the beginning of the thirte with century; then, Holinshed’s Chronicle iu toe Elizabethan Eng lish; and, closing the procession, the stately figure of Shakespeare's Lear ! It took a thousand years for the germ which had first been planted among the rugged moun tains of Wales to develop into that perfect flow er whose bloom and fragrance we so much ad mire to-day. Let old Greoffrey of Monmouth, then, credu lous fabulist as be was, receive his share of the praise which is lavished upon the great dramatist Let the humble laborer who broke the ground and sowed the seed be not forgot ten in the greater glory of him who reaped the noble harvest. The old monks ‘Chronicle’ be came one of the cornerstones of romance; and there is scarcely a tale of chivalry down to the sixteenth century which has not directly or in- fi.rectly jeceived from it m%ch of. its coloring. Some matter-of-fact people may not think this particular effect of its influence very beneficial. But we must remember that whatever may be the blemishes of this species of literature, it is better for a people to have the literature of le gend and romance than to have no literature at all. Such a literature was suited to the wants and requlments of that age, aud tended to keep up a high and honorable tone of feel ing that often manifested itself in correspond ing actions. And even if we should concede that the Wale and Layamon and the whole cy cle of Romances of the Round Table might have been consigned to oblivion without auy regret of their loss based upon their own mer its, still this does not prove that their extinc tion would not have inflicted a serious injury upon the cause of literature; for it is to the pre vious existence of this class of composition that we are indebted for some of the finest pro ductions of the human intellect—not only pro ductions, which, like Sheakspear’s ‘Lear’ and ‘Cymbeline’ and Tennyson’s ‘Idyls of the King’ drew their materials directly from the great store-house of popular legend, but also such productions as the Don Quixote’ of Cervantes, and the ‘Orlando Farioso’ of Ariosto, which were intended to caricature the romances of chivalry so popular iu their day. We have said that the legendary chronicles and tales of chivalry, which constituted the mental pabulum of the English people daring the middle ages, were snited to the popular temper aud spirit of that day. We go father and say that their influence was more benefi cial than would have been the influence of a more exact and critical literature. The age of faith must always precede the age of reason. National legends invariably fill a large space iu historical literature, and they spring not from accident but from a deep and prevail ing principle in human nature—not from the mere propensity to falsehood, but from that aoble sentiment which causes all of us to reve rence the past. The heart of every people craves a knowledge of its ancestry; and if no authentic records be forthcoming, imagination will work upon such slight hints as tradition affords, and out of these misty, gossamer, un substantial threads wili weave its legendary fabrics, its heroic lays, its ballad minstrelsy, its romances and its epics, with which to cov er the bare nakedness of the past. In accordance with this principle, early his tory abounds with prodigies and portents, mi raculous agencies and supernatural interposi tions—stories that are often grotesque, but some times impressive; for underneath all their ab surdities and extravagances frequently lies a truth essential to humanity, a moral that all subsequent generations may study with profit, or an illustration of manners and customs and character more vivid thau we can get from the soberer pages of philosophical history. Phi losophical history too often presents nations to our view under the aspect of so many insen sate machines moved by military force or the craft of kings, instead of that inner life of the nation which develops its character and shapes its career in accordance with those principles which are best discovered in the histories which the people have written for themselves. For instance do not the heroic legends of early Rome furnish us with a key to the subsequent greatness of Rome ? It matters not that the details of this early history are fabulous, they show us what was the favorite type of charac ter among a people whose self-saorifioing devo tion to the cause of their country was the source of their unexampled career of conqaest, In another aspect, legendary history is often truer than critical history. The legends have at least the merit of showing us human beings— it may be only fabulous men and women, but ■till beings with human hearts actuated by the passions aud motives of humanity ; whereas, in many a stately history of authentio timea we find only names—names of real personages, it is true, but still nothing more than ^ames without a principle of life in them, so that they are to ns as unreal as if they belonged to another or der of beings, or had enacted their history on another planet, existing in our hazy concep tions of them with outlines a great deal more shadowy and indistinct than those in which our memory clothes the fictitious beings with whose joys and sorrows we have learned to fee, a warm human sympathy, through the medium of the legend monger, the romancer and the poet. Associated with that innocent docility of be lief which gives prevalence to legends and tra ditions, there undoubtedly exists a vast amount of stupid superstition. Later ages outgrow all this ; but the growth is not always a healthy and salutary one ; for if unthinking credulity is to be avoided, there is an error in the oppo site extreme, viz : an unthinking skepticism, equally absurd and far more dangerous. It is just as irrational to believe too little as to be lieve too much. The first reactionary movement against his torical legends leads to the rejection of them in.toto, as composed entirely of fable, and befrn altogether of superstition and credulity. But a calmer and wiser criticism detects ia them the genial materials of history, monstrously shapen, it is true, but still resting upon a solid foundation, from which it ia tbe^uty of the true historian to clear the rubbiseTnot by in culcating a sweeping skepticism, Itot by a just aud sagacious discrimination betwe&a what was actual and what was fabulous. Eminent his torical minds, like Niebuhr’s, have been able to do this, and have actually made di-scoveries of historic truth in what used to appeap.so inextri cably fabulous as the early history Rome. In like manner, buried beneatu the mass of old British legends, we are able now to say that there are some grains of truth. Philology coming to the aid of the kindred science of history, pronounces that the claims of the British Celts to a remote antiquity are not so absurb as one might suppose. That the Celtic languages are among the old est of the great Argan, or Indo-European stock —far older than either the Greek or Latin —is now a well-established doctrine of comparative philology ; and that the first wave of emigra tion that rolled over Europe from the primeval home of the Argan race iu Asia w,>s Celtic, is abundantly clear from the evidence of geo graphical names. The liaes in which Mrs. Sigourney has alluded to the aboriginal no menclature of the rivers of America, may be applied with equal truth to the Celtic river names of Europe. ^ ‘Ye say they all have passed away, That noble race and brave, j ‘That the light canoes have vanished From off the crested wave; That mid th- forest where they walk There rings no hunters shout: $ But their name is on your waters, Ye may not wash it out - ' The home of the Celt is no longer the whole boundless continent; they breathe their native air only among the Hihglands of Scotland, the green fields of Erin, and the rugged mountains of Wales and in the Isle of Man, and in Breta gne, in France. But the fierce Gauls, or Gaels, who tried the mettle of Ciesar s veterans, and who three centuries before vJtB->ar’s day had reduced Rome to ashes, once dwelt on the banks of nearly every stream in Europe, and have left the rooord of their migrations on mountain- peaks as mile-stones. That all proper names were originally signi ficant epithets, we need not stop to argue. Now, European river-names, in the vast majority of cases, can be snown to be significant only in the Celtic dialects. Thus, the five chief Celtic words for‘water,’viz, Avon, Dwr, Uisge, Rbe, and Don, appeared in the names of nearly all the larger and many of the sm .Her streams of Eojjope (F'^r.details a »e ‘Words aud Places,’ Chapter IX.) So Msothe various Celtic adjectives for rough, gentle, smooth, croked, broad, swift, clear, muddy, black, white, yellow &c are found in the names of a large proportion of European rivers. Not only in the British Isles, but throughout Spain, France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy, we fiud vil lages which have Teutonic or Romanic names standing on the banks of streams which still retain their ancient Celtic appellations. And as for monuments compare Mount Pindus in Greece, and the Apennines in Italy, with Pen- ruos, &e., in Wales, and Bennevis, «fcc., in Scot land, Pen is the Cymric and Ben the Gaelic for ‘head.’ The first populations of Europe being thus proved to have beau Celtic, we cannot dismiss with a sneer the claims of the British Celts to a history as old, and probably as authentic, as that of the Greeks before Pisistratus (5Gl), B. C.) It was not until this epoch that the art of writ ing (except on such materials as stone and met al) began to be used in Greece. Previous to the Pisistratidal, the knowledge of historic events was kept alive just as it was among the Celts, by the recitations of bards. The ‘Homeric question,’ as it ia called, has enlisted, on ad verse sides, scores of learned disputants. Wo have had volume npon volume to prove or to disprove the reality of the Trojan war ana its heroes; but no critic, so far as we know, has deemed the ancient British annals worthy of his attention. Yet Achilles, on Homer’s page, is not so grand a figure as Lear on Shakspeare’s. The Bard of Avon has followed very closely the leading incidents given him by the historian— the chief variation being in the catastrophe of the tragedy; according to the legend the heart broken king ‘again after three years obtained the orown.’ Now, how much of truth there was in the narrative as Shakspaare found it, is pre cisely on a par with the question, how much of truth was there iu the legend of iEaeas as Virgil found it. This Niebuhr and others have shown to be, so far as his voyage to Italy is con cerned, a pure fabrication; and perhaps the legend of King Lear may have as ljttle founda tion in truth. But until this is 'hsoertained— though it is doubtful whether sufficient mate rials exist in this case to throw any light on the subject—we must rest the question on the gen eral principle that applies to ali popular legends; it is much more likely that reality was at least the thread upon which the legendary incidents were strung, than that everything^was invented. Pure fiction is a product of modern times. The aucients had no novels. We believe King Lear was a real personage. This seems to have been the belief of Dr. Zachary Grey, who in 1857, published in London some ‘ Notes on Shaks- peare, ’ in which he makes the following obser vation on the line in Shakspeare’s Lear, where Edgar says that ‘Nero is an angler iu the lake of darkness:’ ‘ This is one of S'takspeare’s most remarkable anachronisms. King Lear succeed ed his father, Bladud, anno mundi 3105; and Nero, anno mundi 4017, was sixteen years old when he married Oetavia, Caesar’s daughter.’ If Lear were altogether a fabulous personage, there could be no anachronism in placing his era subsequent to that of Nsro. virtuous woman. He may offer her his fortune, and, in a worldly point of view, elevate her to a level with his own, but is this promotion ? What is the foundation of his lofty position ? Is it not avarice for sordid gain? So, unless she be an exception to the standard of excellence in womanhood, and he be beyond the hope of re form, the elevation is, even in that case, on his side. She may teach him to center his affec tions not on his wealth, but the Giver from whence its proceeds ; she may inspire him with benevolent principles, and induce him to make abetter disposition of his money than for mere selfish purposes. It is only refined natures that can elevate the soul, Promoted indeed ! I should like to know to what step of advancement a woman attains when she weds a gambler, drunkard, or any villainous species of mankind. It is all very well for men to talk of “promoting” some femi nine creature, but it is a little strange that he should be able to do so, when he can scarcely exist without the smiles of the very being whom he desires to elevate. Only let her hint that she does not desire any snch elevation, and he is ready to take an overdose of laudanum, or morphine, or terminate his existence more speedily by blowing out his brains. But if the chosen'one be ambitious and consent to become thus “promoted,” the lofty position to which she is raised, without her support and influence, would be like a house built upon sand. In the hour of adversity, it is she who i3 the stony foundation. I wonder which cur cynic thinks was tbe most promoted by the union, Queen Victoria by marrying Prince Albert, or Prince Albert in wedding England’s queen? Aud in our own country, if asked upon which the greater honor had been conferred,Mr. Hayes for wedding such a woman as his noble companion is represented to be, or Mrs. Hayes in marrying our President? I should unhesitatingly attribute the highest degree to the former. There is many a woman who is a ‘crown to her husband,'but I have never heard of a man being a crown to his wife. She it is who brings the crown, and she wins it, ac cording to Solomon, by her virtue ; so her hus band has no part in conferring it. This masculine desire to promote some female, must be well nigh universal, for the whole world Is engaged in that kind of business. Pity that so many of them fail in their mission. And a still greater pity that there are so many hundreds and thousands of women waiting for some‘lord of creation’to come along and pro mote them to wifehood. How exalted the mar ried one s must feel! PIANO & ORGAN loddw iv ”AfcYS Ail & Bates hold the field » U , h the 1 000 Superh Instruments from Reliable Makers at Factory Rates. Every man bis 2®“ Went. Bottom prices to all. New Pianos. $1jO, SI79. New Organs, $IO, $.70, $1)7. Six years guarantee. Fifteen days trial. Maker’s names on all Instruments. Square dealing, the honest truth, and best bar sains iu the U. S. From $50 to $100 actually saved in buying from Lqilrten Bates’ Southern w * ol *’*“' le Pia *t» and Organ Depot, Savan nah, Ga. l46-4t DIANO and Organ Playing Learned in a Day ! No fraud. Particulars free. Agents wanted. Rare chance. Ad- . -„ nts wanted, dress A. C. MORTON, Atlanta, Ga. 146-tf 40 Agents- $10 outfit ree. P. O. VICKERY. Augusta, Maine. J WATCIIFH. Cheapest in the known world. Sample Watch. Freeto ’Agents. Address, A. Coulter & Co., Chicago, toua g p FOR DISEASES OP f V LIVER STOMACH >Vv.^S« BOWELS For P/Ctj bte*aaddre« Dr. Sa-j £♦3 eMBTMMlfcV S acitaaiwcHE.\ a IWCaCOMIUKS.^ SI1JCU3HE8S, ; > adyspepsw.,* CLEARS THE /E <NPLEXmZ*2 Nrw V-rV NOTICE. In compliance with law, notice is hereby given that all the Stock owned by each of us in the Georgia Bank ing and Trust Company, has been sold and transferred. M. G. DOBBINS, 144 ~ 6in JNO. D. CUNNINGHAM. Amusements Puzzles, Chess, Conundrums, Prob lems, Charades, and Kinks of all Kinds for Kinkers to Unkink. s 'J w?kin your own town. Terms and $5 outfit free Address H. HALLETT & CO., Portland, Maine. ’ VICK’S Flower and Vegetable Seeds. Are Planted, by a Million People in America, See Vick s Cataloaub — 300 illustrations, only two oenta. Vick’s Illustrated Monthly Magazine—32 pages, flue illustrations, a id colored plate iu each number. Price $1.25 a year, five copies for $5 JO. Vick's Flower and Vegetable Garden, 50 cents in paper covers; with elegant cloth covers, $1.00. All my publications are printed in Knglish and Ger man. Address 14o-tf JAMES VIOK Rochester, N. Y. TO COKtlESPONDKNTS. All communications relating to this department of the paper should be addressed to A. F. YVurrn, Elbertou, Ga. Chess Headquarters—Young Men’s Library Associa tion, Marietta street. Original games aud problems are cordially solicited for this column. We hope our Southern friends will re spond. SOLUTION TO PROBLEM NO 5*. 1. R K B8. PROBLEM NO. 55 By Sigmund Herzberg, Pontiac, 111. —SUP vl m mm lH H! a wk 111 mm m mi m m ■ ■ WM iff WM WM i lll $1200 ^ Sulary. Salesmen Wanted to sell otir Staple Goods to dealers. No peddling, FxiHrnacM paid. Permanent employ ment. address S. A. GRANT k CO, 2, 4, C A b Home Sl. f Cincinnati, O. WIGS—TOUPEES. Established 1849. Female Promotion. tBY BOSA V. BALSTON. I once heard a surly reoluse, of the masculine type, say that every woman became ‘promoted’ when one of the apposite sex led her to the ma trimonial altar. This assertion, no doubt echoed by others, I most emphatically deny. The or der is at least rerersable; for many a iran has been elevated by marriage, and some women raised to a Bphere higher thau that which they originally occupied. But, as a rule, it is the man who has the greatest need of reformation, and some one to soften his beastly nature, and nothing does this so effectually as a pare and White to play and mate in three mores. (Continuation of notes from last week.) ifi Nearly half au hour was spent in discussing the situation here. Mr. Masou suggested P R li as promis ing, but it was at once tateoad on the ground that Black might capture both Pawns and still establish a success ful defense. He then proposed P Kt 6, feeling sure that the pushing of either Pawn was essential to the main tenance of the attack, but Mr. DeVaux, after a careful examination, pronounced against it. Mr, Benginger was neutral, and the discussion went on. Finally, admonished by tbe lapse of time, that some thing had to be done, R K Kt was indicated, underwent a close scrutiny of full thirty seconds’ duration, was th‘ ught ‘•safe,’’ approved aud made. The result shows it did not sustain the expectations formed of it; the sub joined * analysis, for which we are indebted to Mr. I. E. Orchard, proves that one of the moves above referred to, viz: P K R 6 should have been adopted instead, aud the following likely continuation shows the other, P K Kt 6 to be not inferior; S2. P K Kt 6, B PXP.’ 23. Q R 3, R B 3; 24. PXP, PXP; 25. B q 5. and theugh Black has a Pawn, Plus their position is not enviable. (g) Ou a par with its predecessor. The Bishop should have been left at Kt 8. (b) The game is now decidedly in favor of Black, and remains so to the end. (i) Precipitating the catastrophe; but if they had acted wholly ou the defensive they would have sacrificed what ever chanoe of escape such a move affords. It is better to die in tbe field than starve in a fortress. (k) The final mistake ! Even now B to Q might have led to a draw. *In corroboration of the opinion expressed upon the 22d move for White, we present the following letter, received from Mr. Orchard, who is well known as a skill ful and careful analyist: Columbia, S. C., Jan. 8, 1878. To the editor of American Chess Journal—Dear Sir: 1 have just carefully examined the second game in the “consultation match” betwesn Messrs. Brenginger, De Vaux and Mason, vs. Messrs. Delmar, Mackenzie and Teed. I find that this party, up to the 22d move, was played with commendable accuracy and spirit by both sides; but at that juncture it seems to me, and I think the subjoined analysis will make it apparent to others that the Waite allies ma te a fatal error. If, instead of playing: 22. K R K Kt, the attack had advanced P K R 0, they must have won the game by force. White Black. | White. Black. 22. PKK6 KtxP 26. KPKR5 QRQ3 This is evidently Black’s j This is as good as they best reply. [have. 23. Q K B 5 Q K Kt 3 (a) 127. K RXKt R K Kt 3 ! I 24. PXKc P QXP I ! 28. RXU QXR 25. Q R K Kt F K R 3 I t |29. QXQ wins. a 23. QKB5 QKB3 I the former variation (but 24. PXKt P QXP i this seems to be inferior to aud this brings about the'KXP.—-Ed. Ameriean Chess same position as in I Jour. b Established 1849. Practical Wig and Toupee Maker. Hairdresser, and Im porter of Human Hair and Hairdressers’ Materials. Wigs aud Toupees for ladles and gentlemen a speciality. All kinds of first-class Hair Work, Switches, Curls, In visibles, Saratoga Waves, etc., on hand and made to order. 44 East Twelfth Street, New York, Between Broadway and University Place. 137—6m KNOW A new Medical Treatise, “The Science op Life, or Selp-Preservation," a TUYQCI C"l> Jok for everybody. Prioe SI, sent by I n I OCLl mail. Fifty original prescriptions,either one of which is worth ten times the price of the hook. Gold Medal awarded the author. The Boston Herald says: “The Science of Life is. beyond all comparison, the most extraordinary work on Physiology ever pub lished.” An Illustrated Pampnlet sent LI C A I free. Address DR. W. H. t-ARKEK, nt.nL No. 4 Bulfiuch Street, Boston, Mass. 137-ly THYSELF I A YEAR. Agents wanted. Busi ness legitimate. Particulars free. Address J. WORTH & CO., St Louis, Mo. Black has one more de fence which is worth exam ining. though it likewise is insufficient, viz: 22. P K R 6 KtXP 23) Q KBS PXP This is the best looking 26. RXK R P 24. Q R K Kt Q K Kt 3 ! ! 25. QXP. Now Black has only two lines of play worthy of consideration: P Q B 5 and Q R Q. 25. P g B 5 move for the defense, and at; This amounts to the same first sight seems to be an thing as QxK. adequate resource, but upon 27. RXQ+ PXB careful examination it too!28. QKKtS PXB will be fouud useless. 29. PXP and Black has no Ichanee. 1 he above are, I think, sufficient to demonstrate the trutu of my assertion that, if the attack had discarded B Kt for their 2id move and adopted the move suggest ed, the result of this Important contest would have been different. Reepeotfully. I. Edward Orchard. (The American Chees Jour., March '71 T HE SUBSCRIBERS still continue to carry on the busi ness of ENGRAVING ON WOOD in all its branches. Their facilities are such that they are enabled to execute all orders promptly and in every style of the art, upon the most reasonable terms All kinds of book illustrations, views of buildings. >na- chinery, landscapes, portraits, societies' seals, druggists' labels, newspaper heads, billheads, etc., etc., drawn and en graved in themost approved manner N. ORR & CO. 52 John Street, New York M. H. L ANE, ATTOBHY AT LAW, Washington, Georgia. Will practice in all the counties of the Northern Circuit Business solicited. 0ffi«e'0ver Green Bros- Confectionery Store- Will attend to business in any part of the State. 138—tt JOHN D. CUNNINGHAM, ATTORNEY AND COUNSELLOR AT LAW, Ofyices : 5 and 6 Centennial Building, No. 1 Whitehall Street. ATLANTA, GEORGIA- Will practice iu the Supreme Court of the State, the United States Circuit and District Courts at Atlanta. The Superior Court and Court of Ordinary for Fulton county, and in the City Court of Atlanta Special attention given to Commercial Law. Collec tions promptly remitted. 151-1y A FEW Pupils, Wanted. either iu the Literary branches or Music, or'both, by a lady who is thoroughly acquaint ed with the best methods of instruction aud who has had much experience in teaching. Higheat testimonials can be given of her ability as a teacher. Address M. H. 8., 147-tf No. 57 Marietta street. SI 25. A MONTH AND EXPENSES to Agents. Send stamp lor term-. S. C. Poster A Co., Cincinnati, o, 144—M 'JL Mm